User talk:Rje

Welcome to my talk page. If you have any comments, questions, queries, insults etc. please feel free to add them to the bottom of the page and I'll get back to you as soon as possible.

DW Stadium

"There are two claims that have been added to the article in the past week, neither of which are verified nor attributed to any source. I have attempted to tag these appropriately, but it keeps being removed in place of weasel words. Repeated reversion of an article between two editors is known as an edit war, and is never allowed under any circumstances. When two editors are warring, as would be the case if the reverting were to continue, then consensus should be sought on its talk page. Failure to resolve difference through this medium will result in third party intervention.

The two claims in question are: [edit] Reference to 'Boston'

The rugby league club were granted the East Stand, which they renamed 'The Boston Stand' in tribute to the Welsh winger Billy Boston, although Wigan Athletic fans jokingly claim the name derives from Boston United whose failure to achieve promotion to the Football League in 1978 led to the inclusion of the Wigan club.

A source has been linked to the claim which confirms Wigan Athletic did indeed take Boston United FC's place in the Football League. This was never in question. What I questioned was whether Wigan Athletic fans really do jokingly refer to 'Boston' in this way. A simple Google search produces not so much as a newspaper article or a blog to support this statement. GW(talk) 22:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd say if it's not sourced, get rid of it per WP:V. It's not particularly encyclopedic anyway. Nev1 (talk) 22:47, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I am unconvinced that this is really encyclopedic anyway, obviously something such as this would have to be sourced if it were to remain. Surely if the fans made a big deal of this there would be some mention of it somewhere. Rje (talk) 13:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Harry Lyon (fans choice)

As Wigan Athletic had spent many years in the lower leagues it was recognised that most of the players were not known at national level and as the fans' choice, Harry Lyon, had already been honoured at the site of their former home, Springfield Park, the ground's main West Stand was renamed 'The Springfield Stand', in recognition of the club's original base.

Firstly, recognised by whom? Wikipedia demands that all claims be linked to reliable sources. To claim that something has been recognised without actually saying who it has been recognised by implies authority and thus violates this guideline.

Secondly, no source has been linked to the claim that Wigan Athletic fans were given a poll to decide on their player, or that Harry Lyon was voted, or that he was overlooked in favour of Springfield Park because he has already been honoured. Again, a simple Google search produces no results to confirm any of these claims and inferences. GW(talk) 22:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

You're right about having a source for the claim of recognition. It would seem odd to me that the club would go against the wishes of the fans on something like this and for there to be no mention of it in a reliable source. The fact that the Springfield Stand is named after the old stadium should remain, but the rest should go if there isn't a source for it. Rje (talk) 13:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC)"

Rje, with all due respect, I don't think you have any link to Wigan or the sporting clubs therin and therefore do not understand the mentality of supporters of both clubs. Think fans of Liverpool and Manchester United: they are not the best of friends. Although from different sports, you have the same situation in Wigan with Wigan Athletic and Wigan Warriors with the supporters of one team undermining the other at every opportunity. You will never be rid of an edit war. Ginger Warrior by his username is a supporter of Wigan Warriors and will no doubt call to question anything that views Wigan Athletic in a more favourable light, gives them more Wikispace than the rugby club or indeed pokes fun. Please bear this in mind. I refer to his comment as proof of this: 'A source has been linked to the claim which confirms Wigan Athletic did indeed take Boston United FC's place in the Football League. This was never in question. What I questioned was whether Wigan Athletic fans really do jokingly refer to 'Boston' in this way. A simple Google search produces not so much as a newspaper article or a blog to support this statement. GW(talk) 22:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)' You could flip the point between opposing fans forever and a day, but this will be seen as a detrimental comment by the rugby fraternity while being made frequently by football fans verbally and on messageboards. Do some research rather than relying on the limitations of Google.

The comment 'It would seem odd to me that the club would go against the wishes of the fans' is laughable as the owner of Wigan Athletic makes all the decisions, the fans don't get a say and never have had one. This is the official statement from the club: [1] which reads like there had been numerous discussions which is complete rubbish. Mr Whelan had the campaign brought to his attention by local journalist, Paul Kendrick (Wigan Observer) and made the decision to rename days later. Also the Latics representative Mike Taylor was unknown to the majority of Wigan Athletic fans. This is where the renaming campaign began and this is a fact!: [2]. The fans wanted The Springfield Park Stand only to be given The Springfield Stand. If you follow the link, click the 'Springfield Park Stand' link at the top right of the page where you can follow the campaign in its entirity. Unfortunately most of Springfied Park's history was in the time before the internet so nearly all the references are on fansites such as the Springfield Park Memorial. This has been researched over a period of 15 years through newspaper articles and the few publications available by a number of people and is the nearest thing you will find to a history of the ground. I hope this clears up the situation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.25.77 (talk) 13:05, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have misunderstood me. I do not consider the specific banter between rival fans to be especially noteworthy. Unless such exchanges are picked up by a wider audience, I do not think they are worth noting in an article. I honestly do not consider message boards to be a reliable source.

You quoted me out of context on the second point. I did not question the fact that the stand was named after Springfield Park, merely that it would be odd for there to be no record of a poll of supporters. All information on Wikipedia should be backed by verifiable, reliable sources. This is the primary concern of both myself and Ginger Warrior on this point. Rje (talk) 12:27, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILMS October Newsletter

The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FILMS' Tag & Assess Drive and Roll Call

The project's Tag & Assess drive has begun. We will be assessing over 50,000 articles during the drive and we need your help! 200-article ranges can be adopted and completed at any pace. A variety of awards are available based on the number of articles assessed. Please help review whatever you are comfortable with, and if you have any questions, leave a message on the talk page of the drive. In addition, please add your name to the active member list if you have not already. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of fictional future events

You commented in the last Article for deletion discussion. This article is up for deletion again.

You are welcome to comment about the discussion for deletion. Ikip 19:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

Hi Rje, is there any site where you can get pictures of a person without having to ask permission, or if not how do you ask permission? I'm asking this because I saw that you were the one that gave various league players a picture. P.S. What site do you use? Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 14:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Härtling

This article was tagged as an unreferenced BLP. I'm working my way through the unreferenced BLPs in the Children's Literature Project, referencing those I can and PRODing those which don't meet Wikipedia's criteria (with discussion within the project). Peter Härtling appears to meet Wikipedia's notability criteria but my knowledge of the German language and German literature is not sufficient to be able to deal with getting this article referenced properly. I've added one reference (to the author's website) but this is really not enough. I'm mentioning it to you in case you feel like helping. --Plad2 (talk) 21:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just seen your work on this. Thank you very much!--Plad2 (talk) 23:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks very good. I've requested a reassessment from the Children's Literature Portal.--Plad2 (talk) 07:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory Clark (designer) deletion

Personally, I agree. An article that consists of nothing but an infobox is a complete waste and should be deleted. Unfortunately, consensus is not on the side of logic and reason in this particular case. I took a beating at my second RFA for this nom [3], even though an admin did end up deleting it. I'm not going to restore it or anything, I just thought you should be aware that such a deletion is not actually supported by the policy as currently worded, since context was established by said infobox. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Manuel Pinho

On February 23, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Manuel Pinho, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Andrejs Sinicins deletion

Wtf? why you delet Andrejs Sinicins all rights is save and real. To these player ie more ling in website. If you don`t now thet people why you delet. First of all you need search in internet to his name and surname and see all is right. 09:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Z1nz1n1z1n (talk • contribs)

There was an AfD discussion about that article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrejs Siņicins. The consensus then was that the article did not meet Wikipedia's policy on notability. I deleted the recreation of the article as it contravened Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion G4, which allows for the speedy deletion of any article that is a recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion. This has nothing to do with whether Andrejs Siņicins is a real person, but whether he is considered notable by the definition outlined in Wikipedia's policies. Let me know if you have any questions. Best wishes, Rje (talk) 00:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Madrid C coaches

Thanks for your addition to the coaches section. It's difficult to find info about the third team! Raul17 (talk) 00:48, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One World Trade Center

Hello and thanks for your answer.

In fact, the building is offically known as One World Trade Center, 1 World Trade Center is it´s adress. Other buildings have an "One" as well at the beginning: for example One Prudential Plaza, One Liberty Plaza and much others. The buildings known as One World Trade Center by it´s developer (owner), the Port Authority: [4], the architect: [5] in the media: [6] & [7] and by secondary sources: [8] and here is listed, that 1 World Trade Center is only the adress. I think that should be enough. Regards, Jerchel (talk) 14:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I copyed the message on the talk page. At German Wikipedia I wrote the same on the talk page but no one replied. There was no discussion. After a few weeks I wrote that I will move the page in the next days. And I did. Until today nobody disagreed. Jerchel (talk) 16:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please request to move on the page "requested moves" with copying my message. I do not know how this works, because we do not have a such page in German Wikipedia. Jerchel (talk) 17:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your help. How long does it take until it is decided? I don´t know how this works, because we do not have such a page. Jerchel (talk) 18:18, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what will happen now? A week is now passed. I think we should move the article now. Jerchel (talk) 14:06, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletion of Talk:Dennis Willis

Hi. I notice that you recently deleted this talk page connected to the article Dennis Willis under speedy deletion criteria G7, "Author Requests Deletion". However, G7 says:

...if requested in good faith and provided that the only substantial content to the page and to the associated talk page was added by its author.

I would interpret this to mean that the "only substantial content" criteria is to be judged by the contributions to both the article and the talk page. In this case, while User:DJWJR may well have been the only contributor to the article's talk page, that's not the case of the article itself, where myself and one other editor also contributed.

Considering this, I wonder if you would think about undoing the deletion. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for taking the time to explain the deletion - I understand, and, under the circumstances you describe, your action was entirely justified. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

23prootie's God

Just for you information, he/she almost likely a sock of banned user., 23prootie (talk · contribs) just here to cause some trouble as usual. Account already hardblocked for being a VOA. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 21:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ameba

Thanks dude, you're the man! Krymson (talk) 02:41, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox french jardin

Thanks for this deletion, I forgot to do so.

Seivolia (talk) 10:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Rje's Day!

User:Rje has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Rje's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Rje!

Peace,
Rlevse
00:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Air Cargo Challenge 2007

Not a problem, the reason for the CSD is that the article does not explain what it is other than it is a competition - a competition for what ? - will leave it a few days see what the creator adds. Codf1977 (talk) 15:36, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{db-album}}s

Thanks The distinction between speedy, prod, and AfD confuses me sometimes. Thanks again. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:46, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

yeah

SOmetimes I don't know which to pick ~Darth Starbo 13:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect deletion of DeNyse

It was not a typo and just because it was a stub doesn't mean you can just go ahead and delete it!!! - Winner 42 (talk) 16:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article I deleted was not a stub, it was a redirect to Denise (given name). The redirect was an orphan and anyone searching for DeNyse would automatically end up at the variant spelling Denyse, which would be more appropriate, it therefore seemed to me that the redirect was redundant. Your stub had been replaced by the time I deleted it, presumably instead of PRODing it. I can restore your version of the article, but you would have to provide sources that show why it is worthy of inclusion, otherwise it will be listed for deletion. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information - we don't need articles about every surname in the world, especially where we don't have any articles relating to people with that surname. Let me know what you want to do. Best wishes, Rje (talk) 17:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CADIVI deletion

Hey I just added new info to CADIVI articleAbe41 (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Al-Dosari (singer), Articles for deletion

Hello, why would they want to delete Abdullah Al-Dosari (singer), why, please remove the mass of Articles for deletion, if allowed, thank you Goodbye my friend .--Black Man 89 (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

James Pearson (politician)

Please can you help me out with this one. I put the history on my talk page. I would be grateful for some advice. Manchesterfire (talk) 01:15, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rje I think you are right to highlight this but my point was that this is not just the same article again. In February he was called as a witness to give evidence to a House of Commons select committee which is a pretty big deal. He holds senior office as the leader of a sub national authority as well as being a key leader in the main citywide government of a major metropolitan city. Can you look at this again please? (Manchesterfire (talk) 00:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Deleted article

An article you previously deleted has been restarted - with a perhaps deliberate mis-spelling at 2010 Motorsport Calendary. You may wish to weigh in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Motorsport Calendary‎. --Falcadore (talk) 02:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archives